Center for Strategic Assessment and forecasts

Autonomous non-profit organization

Home / Economy and Finance / Markets: estimates and projections / Articles
The Economy Is Obama. The disappointing results
Material posted: Publication date: 16-01-2017
The economic situation is the main modern indicator the a country place in the world community, and as a result, the leading component of the strategy for the global dominance of the United States *. In fact, American leadership in the Western world is just a kind of "insurance policy" preferred by provisions of the United States in the global economy **.

The US economy is one of the most diversified national economies in the world and hold the leadership in the world economy of the last 100 years. However, since the early 2000s as a result of the crises, and growth in developing countries, its influence in the world economy declined slightly. The country's GDP in 2010 amounted to $14,72 trillion. and in January of this year, the Treasury Department reported that the U.S. national debt reached a historical maximum – 14 trln. dollars[1]. Already by 2016, he crossed the mark in 19 trillion. dollars[2].

The United States has perhaps the world's largest scientific and technical potential, which is the main factor of the dynamic development and competitiveness in the world economy in the XXI century. American corporations firmly hold the world championship in the field of innovative technologies.

For the United States economy has long been an arena of struggle, for the achievement outlined in the national military strategy goal of a new world order under American leadership[3]. This strategy largely duplicates the purpose of Pax Americana – the construction of a world order under US leadership and support for the dollar.

"We own 50% of global wealth, although we make up only 6% of the population. Our real task in the near future will be creating in the world a system of relations that will allow us to maintain this imbalance without compromising our security"[4]. It should be noted, today the U.S. continues to follow this direction and the efforts of USA to establish a unipolar world order and establishment of appropriate institutions and instruments aimed at it.

Thus, the strengthening of the position of the US as a global financial center are the results of the Bretton woods conference[5]authorizing the creation of IMF (International monetary Fund) and IBRD (International Bank for reconstruction and development) and the position of the dollar.

Even despite the fact that in the reform of IMF has been revised voting share of developing countries, and the total weight of the BRICS countries in the Fund has reached 14.7 percent, the new rules still don't reflect the real balance of power in the world economy, as the largest quota in the hands of the USA and is 16.7%. Thus a blocking stake, allowing it to veto decisions of the monetary Fund, is around 15%[6]. For this reason, since 2010, Americans in all possible ways hindered the reform, reinforcing the position of developing economies. But Russia, China, India, Brazil and South Africa is unlikely to be enough of these half measures.

If the economic hegemony of the United States in the long term is based on technological leadership, in the short term, its main source – the dollar as the world reserve currency. Because of this, each country, company and person insured against currency risk by buying dollar, Willy-nilly, credits American state and society[7]. This explains the global US monopoly on insurance of currency risks. In General, the dollar supply serves the needs around the world in conducting all types of economic operations and transactions. Foreign exchange reserves of the Central banks of other countries on 61% consist of dollars, almost 2/3 of the calculations in world trade is in dollars; the dollar is the measure of the value of many important goods (oil) in the world market; in dollars is 3/4 of international Bank lending. The dollar serve as a single standard, which are equal to all the currencies of the developed countries[8].

Some experts say the threat of reducing the attractiveness of the dollar as a world currency and as a consequence of the transition to national currencies. The fact that no national economy is not large enough to expulsion from the U.S. would create significant problems for the American economy. In addition, no single economy and will not be able to solve this problem, because the dollars circulating outside the United States, serving primarily international rather than domestic operations[9].

I must say, even in the case of the transition of a number of large countries (e.g. BRICS) to settlements in national currencies, the US economy will not be inflicted unacceptable damage. The emergence of an attractive regional currencies especially the developed regions threatens the displacement of the dollar international payments and foreign exchange reserves (in this respect it is worth mentioning the speculative attack by George. Soros, buried first a single European currency – ECU).

The reality is that more than 70 years, the economic power of the United States "legalized" claim of the dollar into the dominant position. However, there is now a widening gap between economic weight and financial resources of America. The United States accounts for about 23% of global GDP and 12% of international merchandise trade, 60% of world industrial production and the same proportion of the world's population located in the dollar zone. The proportion of us companies in the total international corporate investment has declined from 39% in 1999 to approximately 24% currently. However, the influence of wall street on the dynamics of the world markets is higher today than ever before. American Fund managers control 55% of global assets (10 years ago the figure was 44%)[10].

Thus, increasing the difference between the American economy and financial power creates problems for countries that are somehow related to the dollar, due to the fact that the value of the dollar dominance is beginning to outweigh the benefits, which in turn poses a threat to the current global financial and economic system, definitely closed in the interests of the United States. Despite the fact that today's dollar is nothing more than a legitimate means of payment and its value is governed by the quantity in circulation.

The principles of functioning of the world economy must be determined exclusively by the United States. In fact, this is a direct statement that the US goal is world domination. And on the way to this goal, any means are good. "We need to be sure that we write the rules for the global economy, and not countries like China. Today we have the opportunity to open even more new markets for goods and services" because "95% of consumers U.S."[11] live beyond them. In other words, Washington, the world imposing their standards and rules of the game expects, among other things, to increase employment of the population of the United States.

Obama is not a coincidence then mentioned China. The fact that over the last decade, the U.S. share of world GDP fell from 23% to 18%, while the share of China increased from 10% to 15%. If the Chinese model of economic development will not come to a standstill, in the current decade, China will equal the US in size of GDP, and in the middle of this century China's GDP will be twice to beat us according to the exchange rate[12]. In order not to give world leadership in the near future, in 2013 initiated the establishment of two giant economic blocks.

The first of them – the TRANS-Pacific partnership (Trans-Pacific Partnership, TPP) on the basis of which Washington intends to create a regional free trade area in the Asia Pacific region. In case of successful creation of TPP the United States will account for three quarters of the total GDP of countries included in the partnership. This will ensure American dominance in the new economic Alliance[13].

Simultaneously, it was decided to create a Transatlantic partnership on trade and investment (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, TTIP) with the European Union. Thus, according to the idea of American strategists, the United States will be free to attend the market, combining 20% of the world population, 65% of world GDP and 70% of global exports[14]. In this case, the US leadership would be obvious and unlikely to be questioned.

Interesting is the fact that the negotiations on the development of these economic blocs take a long time (about TTIP since July 2013, and about TPP – February 2008), and at the request of the States parties to respect the secrecy. There were no visible indications that in the negotiation process there has been some progress and they are nearing completion.

5 Oct Western media reported that in Atlanta representatives of 12 countries (USA, Japan, Mexico, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Peru, Chile, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Singapore) concluded seven years of negotiations and signed the agreement to create a TRANS-Pacific partnership. But yet any clear prospects for further development of enterprises is very vague, especially in light of recent statements by Donald trump on this issue. However, because of the veil of secrecy around the negotiations of both partnerships, in the public domain it is difficult to find accurate information regarding the stage of the negotiation process. They were able to reach such a level that the new President will simply not be able to "rewind talks back" or to preserve the status quo for a number of reasons.

Difficult situation, the US and the Transatlantic partnership. In the EU there is an understanding of the fact that they will not survive economic competition with the United States, and in "partnership" America will freely use the economic achievements of the Old world, were under significant control.

But there is no doubt that Washington will not stop there, and this is due to several reasons.

The first is the accumulation of numerous imbalances in the US economy, and most importantly – the growth of public debt has exceeded the country's GDP. The build-up of debt in the form of issue of bonds the fed is to cover the budget deficit, which rose sharply during the period of implementation of the program of "quantitative easing" (purchasing "bad assets" from private banks and companies)[15]. Through bonds, the fed also cover huge balance of payments deficit on current account (2013 – $ 400 billion., 2014 410 billion dollars.) which in turn is due to a chronic negative balance of foreign trade (in 2013, imports exceeded exports by 700 billion dollars, in 2014 – on 719 billion)[16].

The growth of public debt is a ticking time bomb under the U.S. economy. It is very difficult to say when the clock mechanism finishes the countdown. The only fact does not cause doubts that in case of further increase of the debt "explosion" will be. About the danger of the situation is the fact that the rating Agency Moody's in October 2015 and warned that the sovereign credit rating of the United States in the medium term to start to fall. Do not forget that the global financial and economic crisis in 2008 began with turmoil in the U.S. financial system.

To reduce the budget deficit the Obama administration fails (2014 – 2.8% of GDP), but to balance foreign trade no. The formation of two giant economic coalitions is precisely intended to solve the problem of increasing American exports and reduce the adverse balance of trade and balance of payments to off the clock mechanism on the bomb[17].

The second reason is the probable loss of U.S. economic competition with China. The pace of US economic growth lags behind China. From 1990 to 2010, the Chinese economy grew on average by 9.6% (3 times faster than the us)[18]. Despite the slowdown in economic growth in recent years, China's development speed is 3 times higher than States (USA 2.2-2.4% per year, China of 7.4-7.8%)[19]. Consequence – the share of the US and the West in world GDP falls, but China and developing countries is increasing. If in 1990, according to the IMF, USA and EU countries at current prices accounted for 58.3% of world GDP, in 2010 – 49% and in 2014 to 34.5%. If GDP is calculated at purchasing power parity (PPP), their share dropped to 28.2% – less than that of States of the BRICS group (the whole group was 30.3%)[20].

The third reason – the United States and Western countries have lost the opportunity through the WTO to impose on the world the rules of international trade. A good example is the confrontation between developing and Western countries over the last 14 years in the framework of the Doha round of the WTO about changing (liberalization) of the rules of world trade. The prospects for their completion are not yet visible. The organization was formed by a group of developing countries (including Russia and China), which could supply the Brazilian Roberto Azevedo on the post of Director General of this organization.

The reasons for the creation of new unions are both economic and geopolitical. Their main tasks are:

  • to increase the competitiveness of the U.S. economy, to give it new dynamism and at the same time to eliminate the existing dangerous imbalances;
  • to limit foreign economic relations of China to restrain the growth of the economic power of this country, and the impact of BRICS on the world economy;
  • to create a parallel WTO system of international trade, extending established for the TTIP and the TPP rules on the world economy[21].

Thus, Washington pursues not only economic but also strategic objectives. "Many believe the economic strength of the main instrument of power in the twenty-first century. In the Atlantic and in the Pacific the US goal is to strengthening the multilateral trading system, to create a strong economic partnership, as our unions in the sphere of diplomacy and security. The TRANS-Pacific partnership is a Declaration of long-term strategic commitments of the United States in the Asia Pacific region"[22].

The contents of the TPP agreement were not disclosed, but leaks in the media was. They allow you to say that both organizations are unique in the covered range of economic spheres and go far beyond the usual free trade zones.

According to the publication WikiLeaks, the US has actually made the spread of American patent law in all the countries participating in the TPP. This rule establishes the monopoly of American pharmaceutical corporations on the market. The US also pushed forward the mechanism of trade dispute settlement (ISDS), which gives large corporations the right to solve them with the government of any country to international arbitration, the findings, thus, TNCs (most of them American) under national jurisdiction. Thus, TTP is the next link in the chain of the US efforts to liberalize the economies of Southeast Asia at the Washington patterns[23].

Even if not to take into account the undisguised anti-Chinese thrust of the project, it is possible to present a number of claims. For example, anti-globalists believe that the creation of the TRANS-Pacific partnership is a "corporate coup," only two of the 26 chapters of the agreement on the new block have anything to trade. Most of it is aimed at providing privileges to global corporations, mainly related to copyright and patent rights, and limitation of state regulation[24].
That is, the agreement on the TPP "allows foreign corporations to circumvent domestic legislation and normative acts adopted in the public interest[25].

In addition to the above the contract lies the danger of forming a kind of ring around the borders of China: a new economic block consists of the neighbors of China and countries with which China is most developed trade and economic relations – Japan, USA, Australia, Singapore, Malaysia[26].

The agreement also provides for free access to the Internet, which is used by opposition forces to organize anti-government protests.

Likely that an agreement on the TPP at any can cause a series of color revolutions in countries bordering with China, with serious consequences for internal stability and security of China.

Moreover, Washington and 23 other States (including the US, EU, Turkey, Mexico, Canada, Australia, Pakistan, Taiwan, Israel) are conducting secret talks on the agreement on trade in services (Trade in Services Agremeent, TiSA).

TiSA, the U.S. plan to use to promote the liberalization of world markets in services. As you know, it is a significant part of the economy of Western countries (80% of GDP). In secret documents of the state Department says that the easing of state regulation of the global financial services market gives West a big advantage in the economic war with the BRICS and China in particular, but also with other developing countries, since many developing countries this sector accounts for over 50% of GDP[27].

In addition, the published Wikileaks documents show that TiSA specifies in detail, among other things, rules for the regulation of services of life-support (utilities, health and education). That is, countries that signed the Treaty actually renounce sovereignty in relation to all services in favor of international organizations.

In addition, as a result of concluding these agreements (TPP, TTIP, TiSA) is the removal of Russia from decision-making about the rules of the organization of world trade and in General of international economic relations. Will depreciate the results of negotiations on accession to the WTO, since the value of this organization is the result of creating these three blocks will be minimized. And TTIP will inevitably impact on our trade and investment cooperation with the EU.

Finally, apparently, Washington intends to involve in TRR India (and already attempts are being made to include India in a possible Asian NATO)

Naturally, such large-scale initiatives are hampered by the interests of other leading global players (China, with its ideas of ASEAN+6 (Association of Southeast Asian Nations, plus China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand)). It is clear that the ideas of Washington and Beijing can be implemented simultaneously. Accordingly, the inevitable struggle for the allies between the two centres of gravity already unfolded. In this context, in a different light appears the statement of the President-businessman trump that the United States does not have to adhere to your overwhelmed 40 years ago the position of "one China."

Indeed, it is difficult to expect that Washington will fight fair. The experience of recent years shows that the Americans to undermine competitors actively used as a military force, and the game on the internal contradictions in other States. Thus, Obama has articulated a vision of two large free trade areas (two "rings")[28]. Expect the expected approval of the economic domination did not take place, as far as we can judge, the process of formation of these zones is still far from complete. In addition, the resistance of the States, seeing a threat to US plans, has not been canceled. To counter this kind of integration would the SCO and BRICS and its alternative USA projects (such as the BRICS development Bank, the SCO Interbank Association, etc.). Constantly raised the issue of transition to settlements in national currencies.

So the Americans are actively working to neutralize its geopolitical rivals, while also increasing its economic power by imposing all their rules in business and in politics, and not they promote competition on equal terms. The tools of this policy is very broad, ranging from coups, rebellions, creation of controlled chaos in different States, applying double standards to block the efforts of Russia and China through international economic institutions (IMF, world Bank).

It appears that the United States is hatching ambitious plans for a radical reformation of international organizations such as the WTO and even the UN. When a country has big ambitions, but she has no resources, then the government can take radical steps. The United States can be expected to trigger regional conflicts, including in "hot" form. Some experts even speak of unleashing a new world war. It is worth remembering the situation of the late 1920s – early 1930s, When economic difficulties tried to go method of redrawing of borders and the outbreak of the great war. So this option also cannot be ruled out[29].

In General, the war, albeit on a local scale is beneficial for the American economy. The publication Defense News reported that the head of the Board of Directors of Lockheed Martin , Marilyn Hewson said that the continued regional conflicts in the world are a very important tool for the U.S. military company. Actually, this applies to many military enterprises of the United States.

In addition, States are actively promoting the "American standard" weapons, which is called the "NATO standard" and which essentially copies the requirements of the U.S. armed forces and, consequently, the American military-industrial complex. Naturally, the Americans are pushing the countries of the world and especially NATO countries, to move to American standard weapons".

Thus, formed a "network of partnerships" around the world in which Washington is pushing its own national interests." We must not forget that Obama has also initiated a broad programme on the revision of export controls and the export of dual-use technology to the American military companies without the appropriate "democratic" procrastination could easily enter foreign markets"[30].

Thus, the US have enough economic potential to maintain and consolidate its position of world economic leader. Meanwhile, despite Washington's in this direction efforts, the latest economic indicators suggest that the United States is gradually losing its position of locomotive of the world economic system. Without a radical approach to solving this problem, which has already offered Donald trump, the US will eventually lose its leading economic role and will be unable to return it.

Petrichuk Alexander


[1] the U.S. Economy.

[2] the national debt clock of the United States.

[3] T. Grachev End of the market: the economic war between the superpowers takes on a global scale.

[4] From the statement of the Director of the Centre of planning of the US state Department George Kennan, 1948.

[5] Alekseev D. C. USA and planning of the world order after the Second world war (geopolitical aspect) // Reports of Academy of military Sciences. 2005. No. 3(15).

[6] Troshin N. IMF changes the situation – Russia is in the game. What's next?

[7] Delyagin M. G. World crisis: General Theory of Globalization.

[8] Lomakin V. K. Global economy.

[9] Cm. link 9

[10] When the end of the dollar hegemony?

[11] Obama: Laws of the world economy needs to write the US, and not countries like China.

[12] Horns S. the Obama Doctrine: the Lord of two rings.

[13] Cm. link 14

[14] Global Reich of Obama.

[15] Kholodkov V. M. TRANS-Pacific partnership: with whom, against whom and for what?

[16] Central Intelligence Agency. The world fact book.

[17] Cm. link 17

[18] Data from the International monetary Fund.

[19] A. Samokhin. The TRANS-Pacific partnership: a new round of confrontation in the Asia-Pacific?

[20] World economic outlook: a survey by the staff of the International Monetary Fund. // International Monetary Fund, April 2015. C. 171

[21] Cm. link 17

[22] From the speech in the "Asia society" of the adviser to the President for national security Tom Donilon March 1, 2013.

[23] A. Torin dialogue partnership Russia-ASEAN: results and prospects.

[24] Five weaknesses of the TRANS-Pacific partnership.

[25] TRANS-Pacific partnership: free trade, but not fair.

[26] the Economic war or the cooperation of economies in the WTO?

[27] On the basis of published on the WikiLeaks website on 17 secret documents of the us state Department.

[28] Cm. link 16

[29] Cm. link 16

[30] Sikorski, D. "American standard": US allies will feed us voenprom.


* Anichkina, T. B. the Role and place of regional commands U.S. strategy of global domination.

** Utkin A. I. Doubts superpower. // EPA: USA, Canada. 1994. No. 11. P.3.

Tags: USA , economy

RELATED MATERIALS: Economy and Finance